You may also like...

79 Responses

  1. Michael says:

    Turns out the Bakker link was satire…I got fooled.

    My apologies to all…

  2. EricL says:

    What Bakker link? Did I send you a bad one?

  3. Jean says:

    Lucado’s interview was courageous given his book writing ministry in the evangelical space.

  4. Michael says:


    I was watching some insane videos of his “visions” and sales of “prepper” food and came across a link that appeared to be more insanity.
    Josh the Baptist informed me that it was satirical, so I took it down quickly.

  5. Michael says:


    It was…I’ve always considered Lucado the “Mr. Rogers” of evangelicalism…

  6. Em ... again says:

    closed communion
    my first experience with that rebuff extended to the Believer who cannot see justification for the doctrine of transubstantiation came as a child… my grandparents would attend the community Good Friday services and take me with them… the year came when a Lutheran church hosted the event and we didn’t go… i asked my grandmother why and she replied that since that denomination did not consider her fully Christian enough to partake communion, the Good Friday service as a community event that year was a sham…
    as an adult joining the Southern Baptists (early 1960’s), the pastor warned us that there were churches in the South who had closed communion – open only to their local membership – about as closed as their minds IMV
    many years later, attending mass at my step-father’s church, a nun who knew us well, asked me why i didn’t take communion with them and i replied that, since i couldn’t accept transubstantiation, i thought it would be disrespectful of them to do so… she replied, “you’re every bit as Christian as any of us – of course, you’re welcome to take communion with us”… probably not the Bishop’s view – dunno
    some commenters on the article linked went too far, tho – seeing it as a gathering to approach/search for, God not as a “communion” with Believers only…
    does God smile or frown? i wonder….

  7. EricL says:

    Satire is getting harder to spot in our crazy world. I can understand how you could have been fooled. 🙁

    Good catch by Josh the Baptist.

  8. Jean says:

    I will caution the readers regarding the 3rd link, Role of Trinity in Prayer by Tautges; he makes a serious error in his Christology.

  9. WenatcheeTheHatchet says:

    DG Hart picks a nit, about how New Calvinists admire Calvin so much they forget certain Swiss Reformers who were active before Calvin could even be identified as a Protestant.

    “Is it too much to ask the New Calvinists to see the hand of God in the old Calvinism that emerged in places like Zurich and Strasbourg well before John Calvin was even a Protestant?”

    The answer, to go by observing the last decade of New Calvinists is, yeah, it IS too much to ask. 🙂

  10. Papias says:

    Glad Perry is getting help.

    Myths about church history: I agree with #1, not so sure about #2 and #3. Seems like he wants to downplay the Inquisition as not so serious(only 826 out of 24k – only 1.8 %!).

  11. Erunner says:

    “Thrilled as I am that he is where he has always wanted to be, his departure leaves a void in my soul I don’t expect to fill until I see him again,” stated Jerry B. Jenkins, who co-wrote the Left Behind books with LaHaye, ………”

    I’m happy that Jenkins shared what he did in the above statement. I’ve always run into the mindset that we should all be happy now that our loved one is in Heaven which I have no problem with.

    At the same time it can make others feel guilty for the immense pain and grief they are experiencing and will experience for varying lengths of time.

    It’s a bit strange for me as I get older the number of people in ministry I was impacted by in one fashion or other are now passing away.

  12. Josh the Baptist says:

    Anybody who thinks we’ve heard 1/4 of the truth about why Perry was fired is deluded.

  13. Michael says:


    That’s almost always the case…and it creates an opening for his return.

  14. Babylon's Dread says:

    The pastor who won’t repent of his comment about open marriage is just the sort of thing that a church must expect when we are too intimidated to speak about LGBT with anything but a motherly love language. There are no limits on sexual expression for our culture if consent is established. Any voice that speaks otherwise is considered irrelevant prima facie.

  15. Josh the Baptist says:

    It’s funny. He speaks as if he’s going to rehab, and then will be back soon. The church is not speaking in that manner. Also, there was basically no way to fire him. I mean, the guys with the actual power to fire him were Ed Young, Jenetzon Franklin, Furtick, and some of those types. Driscoll is probably still on the board.

    So, OHHHHH, there’s a deep pile of manure somewhere over there.

  16. Babylon's Dread says:

    The 50 reasons guy is for sure a bit stretched but not much.

    Buzz Dread

  17. Josh the Baptist says:

    Dread, I recent;y spoke to a friend who is a gay-affirming pastor. I asked him where does he get his ideas on sexual morality from. He said that if an act treats a human like an object then it is sinful.

  18. Michael says:


    That is a ridiculous stretch.
    The guy is just a pig.

  19. Josh the Baptist says:

    The guy *IS* a pig, but Dread’s right. If you remove any standard from sexual morality, there is no justification for condemning any intimate act.

  20. Michael says:

    Maybe it’s just me…but a guy defending open marriage is the last guy I care about his views on gay marriage…

  21. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    em – that is the reason for closed communion – to keep folks from doing things they don’t believe.

    Just think if you took communion at the RCC church, you were joining them in their re sacrifice of Jesus on their altar – it’s just like saying amen the Muslim Iman’s prayer at an interfaith prayer service.

    I am surprised that a Lutheran Church hosted a community Good Friday service. The reason they don’t is sso they are not put in the situation to be misunderstood like your mother was.

    It is not about being better or more fully a Christian – but are we doing the same thing. If you agree that you are eating the actual body and blood of our Lord for the forgivness of your sin then you just tell the pastor before hand and he would probably let you in.

    But if you don’t believe you are doing what we are doing and for the same purpose, where is the communion?

  22. Babylon's Dread says:


    Your gay affirming voice is doing what the culture is doing. It is presupposing that cultural values are more authoritative for believers that the revealed text.

  23. Michael says:

    Seems to me that the “communion” isn’t so much with each other, as with the Lord…

  24. Josh the Baptist says:


    Your gay affirming voice is doing what the culture is doing.”

    For anyone reading through qucikly, I need to clarify…it is not MY voice that is affirming.

    Yes, Dread, you are exactly right. Go with the culture, adapt the text.

  25. Michael says:

    At some point we need to acknowledge that we have lost the argument culturally about gay rights.
    It’s done…fina.

    Some churches are caving in trying to be “loving” but at least they’re wrong for the right reasons.
    They left ‘biblical authority” behind a long time ago.

    I’m utterly exhausted by the subject… time to learn to live as exiles.

  26. Muff Potter says:

    Long time Wendell Berry fan here. He’s got it pegged I think. War is and always has been one of the most profitable enterprises and investor can be into.

  27. Michael says:

    Muff…me too. 😉

  28. Michael says:

    As long as I’m already sinking…
    I think for some reason (mainly fund raising and identity issues) that we always need to have an enemy these days.

    We lost the gay war decisively, now it’s immigrants, liberals, and Muslims.

    The devil appreciates all the deflection of attention…

  29. Josh the Baptist says:

    “As long as I’m already sinking…
    I think for some reason (mainly fund raising and identity issues) that we always need to have an enemy these days.

    We lost the gay war decisively, now it’s immigrants, liberals, and Muslims.

    The devil appreciates all the deflection of attention…”

    Ummm….are we suppose to just amen the affirmation of Open Marriage?

    Sorry, you can delete my comments. I was just discussing stuff.

  30. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    “Seems to me that the “communion” isn’t so much with each other, as with the Lord…”

    You can only commune with the Lord if you do what he says and for the purpose instituted. So we would have no communion with each other or the Lord.

    Just imagine what you are saying “we have not standards – do what you will.”

    Where do you draw the line? Is there anyone who gets kept from the table? If the answer is yes, then that would be your form of closed communion.

  31. Michael says:


    Not at all…I just think at some point we need to face the reality of the space we’re in.
    Maybe I’m wrong…but we spend far more time railing against perceived evils than presenting the Gospel.
    I think that’s a mistake…

  32. Josh the Baptist says:

    Oh I agree. We’ve lost the cultural battle. Not just on homosexuality either. We have to focus on the Gospel, and that alone, because truly Jesus is the only answer.

    But most don’t like that answer either 🙂

  33. Michael says:


    I draw the line on profession of faith and one cannot be under church discipline.

    I have no ability to accurately describe what happens to either the elements or the partaker of the Lord’s Supper…and I don’t think anyone else can either.

    Thus, a test on the matter seems foolish to me…

  34. Michael says:


    I think we agree on far more than we differ on…and I’ll repeat again that we love and appreciate you being here.

  35. Jean says:

    “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.”
    1 Corinthians 10:16-17 ESV

    Communion is both with God and with fellow believers. It is a shared confession and proclamation.

  36. Jean says:

    “For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part, for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized.” 1 Corinthians 11:18-19 ESV

    “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.” 1 Corinthians 11:26 ESV

  37. Em ... again says:

    #11-“It’s a bit strange for me as I get older the number of people in ministry I was impacted by in one fashion or other are now passing away.”
    E, you ain’t seen nothin yet 🙂

    my whole frame of reference with regard to life in Christ was formed by people now dead – so glad they’ve left the Book with us – and good sound teaching…

    i tend to think that older – really, really older people – have a little different perspective on matters dealing with sexuality – most of us have gone thru and pretty much come out the other side (except for those who just won’t give up LOL ) with, hopefully, fond memories – that said to say that i am convinced that the LGB and whatever else, ARE victims… they are victims of the exploitive environment that we have created for their formative years – at the very least, too much too soon – one’s brain can program totally apart from one’s volition, so for those impacted i can’t fault them for thinking and saying, “I was born this way,” even though i don’t think that is true…
    i recognize that is not true of those who are genetically mixed and that is another and a separate problem – IMV

  38. Em ... again says:

    Mark 7:15 – that whole chapter indicates that what we ingest does not make us unrighteous, so i’d have to wonder if the converse is true… but that is just a ponder…

    what i find strange is that very few – no matter what their doctrines – can put aside all their personal concerns to just pause and remember the cost, the immutable love of God, the perfect obedience of the Son of man to the Father and the victory … offering us an unspeakable, close to unfathomable, gift

  39. Jean says:

    This blog and the links it provides reports vividly on the horrible consequences of loose doctrine. It’s much easier and “nicer” to go with the flow. However, actually honoring Christ’s sacrifice is never popular. Thankfully, there are still a few traditions left who will hallow His name, guard the truth, and pass it on.

  40. Mr Jesperson says:

    The leading story on Relevants website is very good as well. A quote:
    “I didn’t find a single document that said ‘We need to stop these public shamings because they’re useless.’ But I found a lot of documents from religious leaders, from the court, and founding fathers all of whom were saying ‘We need to stop this stuff, it’s monstrous.’ Good people in the crowd were becoming brutal—the punishments were disproportionate to the crimes.”

  41. Xenia says:

    The Orthodox Church practices closed Communion. You have to be a baptized Orthodox Christian (Russian, Greek, Albanian- that part doesn’t matter) to receive. Different jurisdictions have in-house rules that determine who among the baptized Orthodox may receive on a given Sunday. The Russian church (my jurisdiction) requires that one goes to confession the night before or the day of Communion. We see the two as being linked. Other jurisdictions are not so strict. We are also not allowed to eat any food or drink (even water) from midnight the night before until Communion. There are Sundays when I can’t take Communion because I missed confession or had a cup of tea to wash down some aspirins.

    So if any of you can meet the same requirements that I am held to- Orthodox baptism, recent confession (to a priest), observation of the short Communion fast- you too can receive Communion at my church, just like the rest of us. Who is stopping you?

    This idea that people’s feeling are hurt because they can’t receive Communion at an EO church is ridiculous. If you want to take Communion at an RC, EO or Lutheran Church, join one of these churches. You’ll have to jump some hoops but they are the same hoops we all had to jump. If you think our hoops are ridiculous, then you don’t really want to be in Communion with us anyway, do you?

  42. Xenia says:

    It’s ironic. How many sermons- probably numbers in the hundreds- have I heard during my years as an evangelical (Baptist and CC) where the preacher made the claim that the Roman Catholics, and by extension, the Eastern Orthodox, are not genuine Christian churches (Whore of Babylon) yet take umbrage when told they can’t receive Communion at these churches.

  43. Jean says:

    Amen Xenia.

    I think some Christians are under the impression that visiting a different church should be like dropping in at the Olive Garden. #snark

  44. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    I am going to go next door the Baptist church and tell them in order to show loving community and acceptance that they will need to baptize my infant granddaughter, because it doesn’t matter what they as a local church body believe something is – it’s what I as a visiting individual believe something is.

  45. EricL says:

    I didn’t become a Christian until I was 18. My first church home was Southern Baptist and they were going through a great controversy with the local association during that time. The fundamentalist SBC congregations of the area were upset with this quick-growing fellowship. They accused this church of the crimes of Open Communion (allowing people who weren’t members to partake) and Alien Immersion (accepting members who hadn’t been baptized in an SBC or SBC-approved church by full immersion). There was even a formal district “hearing”, which I attended.

    The church was found innocent but, as a baby Christian, I thought it was all very strange.

  46. Michael says:

    If a professing Christian of any orthodox tradition wanted to receive the Lord’s Table with us,they would be welcome to do so.

    To me, refusal would be the same as saying that the one refused was not a Christian at all,or a defective one at best.

    If you gave my church a theological test to describe all the intricate details of the Supper, they would flunk…and I would too.

    I can recite from rote what must traditions believe…but I think all of them fall short of the mystery of the Table.

    Therefore we simply obey in faith,believing we are being fed.

  47. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    “If a professing Christian of any orthodox tradition…”

    You just ‘close’ on a different level – you can pick and choose who you consider orthodox.

    I don’t know how you can equate folks taking communion who deny any presence of Christ in the elements and whose sole purpose is to do the taking for obedience vs what Jesus said.

    But again, I am the one who likens most communions as a toast to Jesus followed by their communion hymn “For He’s a Jolly Good Fellow.” – but hey, that’s just me 😉

  48. Em ... again says:

    #42- Xenia: i know of no one who(m) i respect in the Faith who “take umbrage when told they can’t receive Communion at these churches.” what makes no sense even with the explanations provided by those “RC, EO or Lutheran Church” doctrines is just that – something that makes no sense to us… no umbrage 🙂

    people who take umbrage are probably in deeper spiritual confusion than sacramental issues … IMHO

    BTW – should California’s capitol change its name?

    God keep

  49. Michael says:


    I’m pretty sure you and I would have the same qualifications for orthodoxy…

    If someone who didn’t hold to any sense of “real Presence” communed with us they would still get the benefit of the sacrament.

    Otherwise…you have to say that all baptisms outside your sect are invalid…

  50. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    “If someone who didn’t hold to any sense of “real Presence” communed with us they would still get the benefit of the sacrament.”

    I think this may not be true. Paul spoke of taking in an unworthy manner – to me this would be the denial of the real presence (and by that I mean in, with and under the bread and wine).

    But we have been here before. On the other hand, I would appreciate it if some evangelical church knowing my position would keep me from their table.

  51. Michael says:

    Then you would have to conclude that those who partake without a Lutheran understanding are guilty of the blood and body of the Lord.

    Do you really want to go there?

  52. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Actual denial of the body and the blood of Christ in the supper? I might go there.

    I think there is a lot less to be confused about in the statements made by Jesus about the supper than there is about the trinity. You have to be pretty willful to deny his words there.

    In the supper Jesus declares “this is my body” how does one deny that?
    In the trinity, Jesus does not make such a clear statement – and we do not let pass off one’s guilt in denial there. Perhaps he meant some type of symbolic trinity or that there was just a representation of a trinity – yes, that sounds like a good comparison.

    But I am too nice a guy to really pass judgment – I just make my declarations.

  53. Josh the Baptist says:

    Michael, you are correct. We agree on almost everything. The things we disagree on are only varying shades of the same thing. Thank you for your continued kindness to me.

    MLD – just for you, if you show up at my church, we’ll make sure you don’t take communion.

  54. Jean says:

    If Luther and Zwingli, two heavy hitters, could not reach agreement, Michael and MLD, neither are you. For us, we submit to our confessions trusting that our fathers in the faith got it right. I would rather we not argue ourselves into frustration with each other. We will have to be content disagreeing agreeably. But celebrating our many points of doctrinal unity.

  55. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    See I don’t see this as arguing at all – in fact I look at it very much in the same tone as Luther and Zwingli… and believe me the two of them did not leave as friends – in fact they had choice words for each other.

    But as I asked above could we still delight or celebrate our many points of doctrinal unity if my position on the trinity was – “I confess the trinity in all that it symbolizes and represents. Whenever the trinity is mentioned I look to what the scriptures said it symbolizes and what it represents.You know Jesus wasn’t really a door (wood and hinges) so we know he was speaking symbolically when he said me and the Father are one.”

    OK, so we have slight doctrinal variance there, but are we still united as loving Christian brothers and sister? Perhaps not.

  56. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Josh – I’d love it. I don’t know why they would do it with baptism but not communion – they are both the same things, sacraments ordained by Jesus. When I went to join an SBC church they would not let me join unless I re baptized (they would not accept my CC baptism) I told them no, but I didn’t insist on membership. As time went I I discussed baptism with them and finally they agreed that i understood what baptism was and that mine was sufficient.

    This is all we ask of people before approaching the table – abstain until we can talk. I couldn’t take communion at my church until I complete a 12 week catechism – but that was so we could know each other and evaluate each others scriptural understandings to see if we were compatible.Probably more pre work than marriage.

  57. Michael says:

    Generally speaking, when one defines an object as something it obviously isn’t,a figure of speech is assumed .
    If I point at my cat and tell you it’s my car, then questions should follow.
    If I tell you that by faith I believe the car is in, with , and under my cat more questions are not without merit.

  58. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Well the speaker in the other instance was Jesus and not you and your cat.
    Jesus could have made it clear – he had perfectly good words in all 3 languages to say represents or symbolizes … but he did not. Jesus is the master of his own body and can do with it what he wants – he can walk on water, he can walk through walls, he can ascend into heaven

    But as a Calvinist you have a distinctly different Christology from me that does not allow Jesus to be present in more than one place at one time – so a different view had to develop as to Jesus’ presence or lack thereof in the elements.

  59. Michael says:

    It goes beyond Christology.
    It speaks to the fact that I go buy a box of crackers and a bottle of wine at Wal Mart and then declare that somehow between Wal Mart and tongue they transformed into the real body and blood of Christ.

    I think I’ll stick to the spiritual presence…

  60. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    All theology is Christology – at least in my camp.

    ” then declare…” and there is the issue again – you declaring being no different than what Jesus declares.

    One thing you have wrong – Lutherans do not believe that the element transform into anything – the RCC does that trick. We believe that at the institution the real body and the real blood become present with the bread and wine – one thing does not transform into the other.

    I believe the words of Jesus and it seems as though you want to but you must first run them through some doctrinal reason maker – to make man sense – not Jesus sense. Many places Jesus speaks of being the bread – now he is demonstrating how and for what purpose.

    Now to that spiritual presence – you are not uncomfortable with that – you actually believe which, that Jesus is separated from his body and meets us ‘spiritually’ or that our spirit departs from our bodies as we partake of the elements? I think the church fathers would have trouble with that one

    But I hope folks learn from this regardless of which side they fall on, that the differences are real and for actual Christological reasons and not just on a whim.

  61. Em ... again says:

    1 Cor. 11:17-29
    “But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse.

    For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part, for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized.

    When you come together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat. For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk.

    What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not.

    For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”

    In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

    For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

    Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord.

    Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
    . . . . . ”

    far more important than the ingredients is event, the most important event in all of the history of man that is behind the instruction – God give us all more wisdom and understanding

  62. Babylon's Dread says:

    I was more accustomed to the expression “close communion”

  63. Babylon's Dread says:

    Discerning the body, or the failure to do so was what marred the Corinthian communion. The text seems to infer exclusion based on all sorts of error from gluttony and drunkenness to class distinction. It also seems to relate to the subsequent elimination of effectual gifts from the normal function.

  64. Jean says:

    Michael #64,

    While one could quibble with a word here or there, the Trueman article linked at #64 is an excellent introduction to Luther’s theology. Trueman’s observations regarding Luther’s theology of salvation as coming from from the outside, and about its objectivity, is very perceptive.

    It is in the ministry of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments that Christ comes from outside us to save us. This is how Luther understood the office of the Holy Ministry (i.e., the job of the pastor). “The minister—preaching, baptizing, and officiating at communion—is merely an instrument by which God achieves what he intends.” (Trueman)

    As I said, this is a very good article, which is worthy of your readers close consideration.

  65. Michael says:

    Carl is one of my favorite guys in my tribe…

  66. Em ... again says:

    it seems to me that the question is much less about the magic that occurs to the ingredients used at the communion table, but is about what is going on in our minds and hearts when we come to partake… if we take the bread (unleavened and broken) and the cup, with our minds elsewhere, trusting the doctrine of some form of transubstantiation to justify us …?… well, is that more effectual than sitting there in the pew grabbing a cracker from the plate as it goes by while making out your to do list for the coming week?

    let each man examine himself seems to have different interpretations, but is Christ present? i sincerely hope so – is communion, like a church bulletin? take it or leave it? i sincerely hope not

  67. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Em, I agree with you that both forms are aggravating to the Lord – you have compared the Roman view (transubstantiation) with the evangelical view (crackers and juice)

    You should now try the Lutheran supper as Christ laid it out Bread & Body – Wine & Blood and not as an act of obedience (evangelical view) but a move of God to actually forgive sin through the eating and drinking.

    And that is what the Trueman article spoke to – God coming to us from the outside – not us reaching to God in our obedience.

  68. Em ... again says:

    MLD- “You should now try the Lutheran supper…a move of God to actually forgive sin through the eating and drinking.”

    then let me rephrase my observation … do i take communion to be forgiven of my sins? nope… i confess my sins to be forgiven of my sins and the communion table reminds me of the cost – Who did it and who receives it…

    with all respect due, i don’t know how my #67 refuted Trueman’s linked article nor advocating for us reaching to God in obedience …?…

  69. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Em, – it just makes my point – we differ. You were the one challenging the Transubstantiation and the crackers and juice crowd – I was just offering up an alternative.

    I think the obedience comment comes in when you speak f having your mind right and paying attention so you can do it right.

    I am seldom in that frame of mind – which is why I go with the premise that Jesus is doing the work for me regardless if I am distracted or not.

    I remember years ago when I was transitioningfrom teaching at Calvary Chapel and going part time to a Lutheran church – I was telling one of my classes one thing I noticed different was that kids were in the Lutheran service – many families sat up front so the kids could see. The pastor called them forward for the ‘children’s message and the rest of the time the kids sat – squirmed walked around etc.

    This one lady said to me “Oh, I wouldn’t want kids in the service. I bring my 17 year old daughter to church trying to get her saved and I don’t want a kid crying when the pastor says something important that she might miss.” I said to her ‘if the Holy Spirit is talking toyour daughter, no amount of ruckus by the children is going to make her miss the message – all children should be welcomed – if they are baptized it is their church also..” See, that mom was trying to do it right instead of just letting the Holy Spirit do his work as he does in the supper.

  70. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    A follow up – at the same time I asked the assistant pastor why children were not allowed in the service (as in they were literally banned) – he told me it would interfere with the video recording, LOL – cracked me up until I realized he was serious.

  71. Jean says:


    When the verse by verse lecture with the Greek word insights goes past 20 minutes, I squirm and wish I could walk around. 🙂

  72. Al says:

    Interesting with regards to Perry Noble.

    Big celebrity pastors struggle with alcoholism and drug addiction a lot more than people realize.

    It’s quite a show that must be put on….and they have to be “on” and deal with the stress and pressure…much like rock stars and actors etc. Interesting dynamics in play. Much more chemical dependency goes on than you know. There are hundreds and hundreds like Perry Noble who are simply getting away with it behind pulpits and up on stages right now.

  73. Al says:

    I think the SBC has a similar “Specially Anointed” thing they teach? Is Josh the Baptist out there? Or is that a Calvary Chapel only thing.

  74. Josh the Baptist says:

    Nope. No special anointing for our pastors. Now any church can idolize their own pastor as much as they like, but the vast majority of our churches our congregational, which means the congregation hires and fires the pastor, sets his salary, etc.

  75. Al says:

    JTB! Thanks for the knowledge brother. Understood.

  76. Al says:

    No wonder Perry Noble got the axe….he didn’t hand-pick his board and couldn’t weasel his way out of it. Makes sense now.

  77. Em ... again says:

    MLD, you are a teacher and an apologist for your denomination… i need to keep that in mind as i sometimes think we’re just talking about the Faith and i realize that doesn’t work

    God keep

  78. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Em, you do the same – you try to make your case.

    Just as a point of interest, I am an apologist for the Christian faith – my denomination just happens to agree.

    Also, “the Faith” as you call it must have structure and definition – it is not just pixie dust flying through the air.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Discover more from Phoenix Preacher

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading